It has improved since version 12.0 but it is still not good enough imo. The main issue I have had is bugs with backing up Exchange 2007 servers.
The fixes in the earlier versions were simply to not use the features! Even in recent versions there are issues. This is the latest one to bite me:- http://seer.entsupport.symantec.com/docs/321184.htm As you can see the solution is to apply a hotfix and then update the agents as well. The updates patched ok on the BE server but pushing the remote Agents failed. So I found a forum post to resolve that. http://www.symantec.com/connect/forums/backup-exec-125-remote-agent-failures Having to run msi cleanup and then reboot the server just screams amateur to me. I'm not saying that things don't go wrong but I've run out of tolerance with Symantec products. I won't be able to reboot this server before the backups are scheduled tonight so they will be missed. It's a production Exchange server. Then of course there is nothing to say that will resolve the issue. There will be another hoop to jump through no doubt. The best example I can give of how bad Symantec is:- On the very rare occasions that I've called Microsoft support for an issue with a server one of their first questions has been "Is Symantec AV installed on this server?" Maybe I've been in the industry too long, but these days I have less tolerance for things that don't "just work". The companies I am employed by spend big money on software only to have to agree to Eula's that really say "if this doesn't work properly, tough shit". It's not good enough. Instead of making things properly everything is rushed out the door so they can be first to market. The whole "we'll patch it later attitude" is so common now. It is even accepted by many people. Hell, sometimes you can buy a tv and it has a fault rectified by a firmware update. A TV! *takes a breath. -----Original Message----- From: Richard Stovall [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Thursday, 6 August 2009 10:42 AM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: Re: OT: Symantec Rant Errrmmm, do you mind if I ask specifically about your troubles with BE12.5? I've been very seriously considering moving to it, though I haven't installed the 60 day demo yet. I kinda figgered it would pretty much work in my fairly simple environment. It'd be nice to know the major gotchas. Thanks, RS On Wed, Aug 5, 2009 at 8:28 PM, James Hill<[email protected]> wrote: > Excuse me for you using the list to vent but I thought I might receive some > understanding from other Symantec vicitims. > > > > Do they make ANYTHING these days that "just works". After being bent over > with their hopeless AV implementation on Server 2008 (Let's break shares on > the server. No servers need shares they must of thought)... actually their > hopeless AV solution in general. I recall re-installing version 10 on about > 24 site servers as that was their solution to an issue. > > > > But don't worry the PR fools said. Version 11 will fix everything. Yeh, it > fixed everything alright. Fixed it so it may never work again. > > > > Now I'm having fun with Backup exec 12.5 and it's many "features". > > > > When renewal comes up I will gladly get rid of them. They *&$^ everything > they touch these days. > > > > /end rant > > > > > > > > ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ ~ <http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/> ~ ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ ~ <http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/> ~
